Omaha, NE vs Portland, OR
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Portland, OR outspends Omaha, NE by a wide margin per resident — $23,675 versus $11,180, a 112% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Omaha, NE holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 90/100 (grade A) against 63/100 (grade C) for Portland, OR — a 27-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Omaha, NE reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Portland, OR carries $1,574 per resident. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: parks and recreation leads in Omaha, NE at $742 per resident and in Portland, OR at $2,477.
They also fund themselves differently: other revenue is the largest single revenue source in Omaha, NE at 17% of total revenue, whereas Portland, OR relies most on intergovernmental transfers at 19%.
Summary
Portland spends 52.8% more per capita than Omaha ($12,495/person difference). Omaha, NE has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (A, 90/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $624 | $0 |
| Sales Tax | $373 | $1,695 |
| Income Tax | $0 | $130 |
| Intergovernmental | $2,622 | $8,979 |
| Charges & Fees | $0 | $3,883 |
| Other | $4,672 | $7,916 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $0 | $1,700 |
| Highways & Roads | $319 | $139 |
| Public Welfare | $1,521 | $3,607 |
| Health | $456 | $0 |
| Hospitals | $0 | $2,893 |
| Parks & Recreation | $742 | $2,477 |
| Housing | $3,045 | $3,694 |
| Sewerage | $0 | $630 |
| Utilities | $581 | $1,845 |
| Other | $4,516 | $6,689 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.